State of the Purple States

[Free Bird]

Of course, all presidential elections lie in the hands of "purple states" like Ohio and Virginia. My question is where do they actually lean even if they can go both ways? For instance, I think
OH: Pure Purple
VA: Tilting D due to recent events being the only data, but still very much tiltable either way. It's very politically diverse .
FL: Pure Purple, but slight R advantage as a whole. Cubans are still loyal. Very close in 12
PA: It's Trending D, but slowly turning around to pure purple given the right candidate.
NC: Leans R
MI: Purple but with a stubborn D loyalty presidentially. Would take an 08 wave to flip it.
WI: Purple but trending R. Love him or hate him, Walker is still popular, and People forget how close 2000 an 2004 were. Have to wait for the clean slate in 2016.
NV: Trending D, but a Libertarian-minded or moderate (Cough cough Sandoval) candidate may turn it around.
CO: Pure purple. Things look grim, but Gardner making a once boring race competitive, Beauprez having a surprisingly strong early showing, and Paul doing well in early polls show it very much still up for grabs.
IA: Pure Purple, trends D. Let's see what 2016 and the senate election brings.
NH: Pure Purple. Really just chooses the more bipartisan Libertarian minded candidates, as long as they're not from Mass, so it is hard to assign a loyalty.
Is it worth calling NM a purple state?

What are your guys rankings on where they are going? Feel free to mention states I didn't

[Vega]

PA: It's Trending D, but slowly turning around to pure purple given the right candidate.

In the Presidential elections PA is always the state Republicans try to get at the end. And always fail to.

I'd add Arizona to that list, it's slightly more red than purple, though. In a few years time it ought to be looking more favorable to the Democrats.

[Free Bird]

PA: It's Trending D, but slowly turning around to pure purple given the right candidate.

In the Presidential elections PA is always the state Republicans try to get at the end. And always fail to.

I'd add Arizona to that list, it's slightly more red than purple, though. In a few years time it ought to be looking more favorable to the Democrats.

PA came moderately close in 2004. It IS worrying though since registered Dems have an outright majority now IIRC.
AZ as of now is still light red. It would take an awful R candidate and great D (96) candidate to turn it blue (red).

[user12345]

I would add Missouri to the list as a slightly more red state. Obama came within 0.13% of winning in 2008 and with the right Democrat (Hillary) it will probably swing more Democratic in 2016.  

[illegaloperation]

"lean" only compares a state to the national average. If a Democratic presidential candidate is winning a state by slightly less than the national average, then the state leans Republican. If a Democratic presidential candidate is winning a state by slightly more than the national average, then the state leans Democratic.

[sg0508]

I don't agree with you on FL.  At the presidential level, it's starting to tilt more Democratic. At the state level, it leans GOP due to the disorganization of the statewide Democratic Party. Obama's repeat victory in '12 in FL was huge.

I also don't agree with WI. It was there for the pickings in '00 and '04 for the GOP.  In '04, Bush led there throughout most of the campaign and lost it in the end. It's swung back to the Democrats since then.  Walker himself will not change the state at the presidential level and he's not guaranteed to win another term this year. 

I agree with you concerning CO, AZ, etc.  although the Democrats should be challenging in AZ better than they are.  Again and like in FL, the statewide Democratic Party isn't in strong shape.

[Free Bird]

I would add Missouri to the list as a slightly more red state. Obama came within 0.13% of winning in 2008 and with the right Democrat (Hillary) it will probably swing more Democratic in 2016.  

And lost it by like 10% in 2012. Selective data statements for the win.

[Free Bird]

I don't agree with you on FL.  At the presidential level, it's starting to tilt more Democratic. At the state level, it leans GOP due to the disorganization of the statewide Democratic Party. Obama's repeat victory in '12 in FL was huge.

I also don't agree with WI. It was there for the pickings in '00 and '04 for the GOP.  In '04, Bush led there throughout most of the campaign and lost it in the end. It's swung back to the Democrats since then.  Walker himself will not change the state at the presidential level and he's not guaranteed to win another term this year. 

I agree with you concerning CO, AZ, etc.  although the Democrats should be challenging in AZ better than they are.  Again and like in FL, the statewide Democratic Party isn't in strong shape.

And insanely narrow. Two election victories presidentially doesn't mean much when Obama is not on the ballot. It'd be like calling Arkansas a swing state in 2004.

[illegaloperation]

And insanely narrow. Two election victories presidentially doesn't mean much when Obama is not on the ballot. It'd be like calling Arkansas a swing state in 2004.

I think you mean battleground state, not swing state.

[Free Bird]

And insanely narrow. Two election victories presidentially doesn't mean much when Obama is not on the ballot. It'd be like calling Arkansas a swing state in 2004.

I think you mean battleground state, not swing state.

My bad. And by the way, I wasn't implying Walker would swing it presidentially. I'm just saying his recall showed that the right Republican can win there. I feel Obama is a another Clinton in a way. Causing trends that are only there because of him (Clinton was strong in the south, Obama the Midwest. Both natives.) and fade when they are gone. I'll wait till 16 to make a judgement. Walker COULD have an influence in Wisconsin if he is the nominee, but gut feeling is he won't run. Same with Warner and even purpler Virginia to be fair.

[illegaloperation]

My bad. And by the way, I wasn't implying Walker would swing it presidentially. I'm just saying his recall showed that the right Republican can win there. I feel Obama is a another Clinton in a way. Causing trends that are only there because of him (Clinton was strong in the south, Obama the Midwest. Both natives.) and fade when they are gone. I'll wait till 16 to make a judgement. Walker COULD have an influence in Wisconsin if he is the nominee, but gut feeling is he won't run. Same with Warner and even purpler Virginia to be fair.

Actually, this is incorrect. Obama is actually particularly weak in the rust belt.

His greatest strength is in the sun belt.

[Vega]

Kerry only won Wisconsin by .38%.

It definitely could be in play. It just isn't sometimes.

[Free Bird]

Kerry only won Wisconsin by .38%.

It definitely could be in play. It just isn't sometimes.

Such as in 2008 and 12. That's why I am stressing why individual candidates , not broad statements, are important.

[WrathOfTheGods]

I would add Missouri to the list as a slightly more red state. Obama came within 0.13% of winning in 2008 and with the right Democrat (Hillary) it will probably swing more Democratic in 2016.  

And lost it by like 10% in 2012. Selective data statements for the win.

[IceSpear]

I would add Missouri to the list as a slightly more red state. Obama came within 0.13% of winning in 2008 and with the right Democrat (Hillary) it will probably swing more Democratic in 2016.  

And lost it by like 10% in 2012. Selective data statements for the win.

I see people using MO's 2012 result for why it is now a solid Republican state far more often than I see people using the 2008 result for why it is a swing state...

[sg0508]

This cycle will give us another major clue about Colorado, although 2010 pretty much confirmed what we already know...the statewide GOP is a mess beyond a mess and '10 was more favorable for the GOP to do some damage at the top of the ballot.  Why? You had open seats that year.  This year, they're fighting against two incumbents.  Although both are beatable, it's going to be tougher and the GOP keeps proving that they can't get it done at the top of the ballot in CO.

[Orser67]

In a fairly close 2016 election, I'd say:

Likely R: maybe GA
Lean R: NC
Tilt R: OH, FL
Tilt D: IA, NH, VA, CO
Lean D: PA, WI
Likely D: NV, MI, MN

[Vega]

Tilt R: OH

Explain.

[henster]

Tilt R: OH

Explain.

OH's PVI is R+1 in a good Republican year it would easily go towards them.

[IceSpear]

Tilt R: OH

Explain.

OH's PVI is R+1 in a good Republican year it would easily go towards them.

2004 was a good Republican year and it was more Democratic than nationally.

[Never]

Tilt R: OH

Explain.

OH's PVI is R+1 in a good Republican year it would easily go towards them.

2004 was a good Republican year and it was more Democratic than nationally.

That's true, but as of now I can see a Republican narrowly winning Ohio and still losing the electoral college. The Democrats could probably do this as well, but it doesn't seem likely to happen to one of their party's presidential nominees soon. 

[Person Man]

Tilt R: OH

Explain.

OH's PVI is R+1 in a good Republican year it would easily go towards them.

2004 was a good Republican year and it was more Democratic than nationally.

That's true, but as of now I can see a Republican narrowly winning Ohio and still losing the electoral college. The Democrats could probably do this as well, but it doesn't seem likely to happen to one of their party's presidential nominees soon. 

Down ticket, Ohio is even more Republican than Virginia or Florida.

[Free Bird]

Why is everyone treating VA like a blue state? Not just here, but in lots of maps. Was Arkansas a hard state for Bush to win after Clinton won it nicely twice? The Obama wins shouldn't be a huge future reading.

[Person Man]

It was given to Bush...

[Free Bird]

It was given to Bush...

What's to say VA won't just be given?